certainly this is the finest fo the 5d series, but the jump from the mark i to the ii was bigger than the mark ii to the iii
making room Canon for the mark iv?

This is a sexy camera and arguably the finest DSLR in the world right now.
The jump from the mark ii to the mark iii is significant in the auto focus (my 50 1.2 L now works beautifully). It focuses more quickly, especially in low light.
I also like the how if feels to hold over the mark ii. The menu is an improvement, as well as the view screen.

Three things that Canon didn't improve much from the mark ii
1. the ISO sensitivity from the mark i to the ii was huge! The ISO quality jump to the mark iii is significant. Grain on the mark iii at 6400 ISO is like 3200 ISO on the mark ii.
2. The video capabilities aren't that different on the mark iii (and the mark i has no video).
3. 21 megapixel for the mark ii, 22 for the mark iii (the mark i was 13).

I am happy that I spent $2975 for this camera. Its a significant jump up in the auto focus and shooting weddings with my mark ii using a wider angle prime lens and the mark iii with a more telephoto prime lens is a nice combination.

If you're a pro like me, get the upgrade! I probably waited longer than I needed.

Feb 16, 2013

tgillespieOfflineImage Upload: Off

Registered: Oct 21, 2011Location: United StatesPosts: 442

Review Date: Jan 26, 2013

Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $2,400.00
| Rating: 9

Pros:

Upgraded AF, Professional Build Quality, Faster Operation

Cons:

AF Illumination Point hard to see in the dark, Image Zoom button

Long time 5D Mark I and II user. Loved the sensor in each revision, but hated the slow/clunky feeling to the camera. The 5D III takes care of this. Canon finally put a professional touch on it. Granted, it doesn't compete speed wise with the 1DX, but I hardly ever need a camera that fast.

For my line of work, wedding photographer, the 5D III is absolutely the best camera for the job. Lots of colleagues using the D800, which is a solid machine too, but having bought into the Canon ecosystem a long time ago, I couldn't be more satisfied with my equipment setup.

Far more than upgrade to 5D II. Almost like a hole new line of small camera. HDR is great. AF is great. Don't HAVE to have a landscape and action camera any more. This is all in one.

Cons:

Initially, I thought this was just a tiny upgrade from the 5D II. I didn't upgrade for a long time until I got the itch from reading a bunch of positive reviews. I was lucky to get-it from Adorama on ebay for 2,799.99. I've used it for a few months now, and I must say it is a fantastic camera. Far more than just a 5D II upgrade ... that seems to be the 6D. This is a whole new all-in-one camera -- I no longer feel the need to have both an action and landscape camera. I just need the 5D III now.

Jan 12, 2013

UlanOfflineImage Upload: Off

Registered: May 14, 2008Location: BelgiumPosts: 180

Review Date: Dec 17, 2012

Recommend? |
Price paid: Not Indicated

Pros:

Brilliant autofocus system, nice LCD screen, great build, good for most of situations (events, landscape, macro, portraits), reactive and nervous, good control tools, very good image quality,

Cons:

still expensive...

With 5D3, Canon answered many customers concerns, no doubt about that. I remember reading all the forum posts asking for no more pixels, but better AF and speed, etc. As many users have noticed, the camera mixes the best of the 5D2 and the 7D.

True, the AF system is spectacular. It is flexible, fast and accurate, either in One Shot or Servo mode. Coming from a 7D, the system is quite familiar, and even better (so not to mention the conservative AF of 5D2). You can easily focus on a target without having to recompose thanks to the outer points and get more keepers. Thanks to its AF reliability, 5D3 has given a new life to some of my lenses, like the EF 50 mm f/1.4.

Sensor dust cleaning is much better than the one of 5D2 (which could drive me nervous). Shutter is quieter than on the 5D2, and even quieter with the silent mode. 6 FPS also makes the camera a nice tool for event photographing. Low light shooting is a dιfini te plus : pictures are clean or easy to PP up to 6400 and even 12500 (though smoothed by NR process).

I find HDR a very highly useful feature (just as the multi exposure mode).

Handling the camera is a pleasure and reminds of the 7D. I really like the grip which is covered with a special rubber. Everything in the build seems solid. The dual card slot is the least you can expect from a camera of that category and price.

AWB, skin tone work pretty well.

A brillant DSLR.

Cons: DR inferior to 6D, no built-in flash (fill-in or remote flash piloting), awkward illumination of viewfinder during focusing, no viewfinder following track of single AF point in Servo mode, no swivel screen, and no wifi for android/ipad control, slow live view autofocus, optional grip doesn't increase fps, no face detection tracking, lack of trap focus or focus peaking, no spot metering at the focus point, no gps, menu: no quick way of navigating from one category to another, sync speed of maximum 1/200 (please, Sir !),

Update: Made a mistake about navigation through menu : yes, you can easily pass from one category to another by pressing the Q button. There is a learning curve with this camera.

No AF-point linked spot-metering which is very important to me, viewfinder issues (black AF points hard to see in low-light situations, lack of pre-flash in AI servo mode makes seeing the tracking point impossible in dim light)

For weddings, event coverage & other general purpose photography, the 5D Mark III is very nearly the perfect camera, which is high-praise coming from a full-time pro used to Canon's 1-series bodies & who depends heavily on equipment to deliver consistent, predictable results..

It caught quite a bit of flack for being introduced at $3,499 but I actually think it is quite the value performer for its pricepoint - at a mid-level price far lower than what the 1Ds Mark III was introduced at ($7,999 I believe?), Canon's 5D Mark III delivers 98% of the same performance, while improving on the former full-frame champion in several key areas.. (I won't bother comparing this camera to the crippled & very limited 5D Mark II, as I really don't think these cameras were meant for the same crowd at all)

Most notably, the 5D Mark III sports an improved AF ability that is noticeably better than the 1Ds Mark III (which was definitely no slouch & my workhorse money-maker for years).. Lenses SNAP to focus on the 5D3 & I definitely noticed more consistently sharp photos from this camera.. The new 3.2 inch LCD screen was very useful for determining sharp photos as well, something I definitely missed on the 1Ds3 when I returned to using that..

That said, the smaller form factor than I was used to & viewfinder regression were big issues for me - I like shooting events with my eyes glued to the viewfinder & not being able to see the AF points half the time was a non-starter for me.. I also missed the AF-point linked spot metering feature (thanks Canon for crippling your products!) on the 5D3.

Ultimately I sold the 5D3 after a month because I found I could live with the 1Ds3's shortcomings more so than the 5D3's shortcomings, & I didn't find myself necessarily NEEDing the 5D3's improvements.. but, the 5D3 still remains one of the more complete digital SLR offerings on the market today & is a great value IMO - strongly recommended for 95% of shooters for sure. (I have no doubt that you'll hear most wedding shooters RAVE about this camera for the silent shutter feature & general performance offerings, it just wasn't for me.)

Auto-focus point illumination changed (and changed for the worse), inability to auto-focus with lenses + teleconverters at f/8, price is higher than it should be.

Simply put, the Canon EOS 5D Mark III is a superb camera in almost every regard. I've owned the Canon 20D, 50D, 5D, 5D Mark II, and 1D Mark III and I am very pleased with this particular camera; more so than the 5D Mark II.

Let me start by talking about the things I don't like, because they really get under my skin. For starters, the 5D Mark III is incapable of being able to use auto-focus when you use a combination of lenses and teleconverters at an aperture of f/8. This is especially odd because Canon has killed off its 1D line. One would think that they expect photographers now to use the 5D Mark III to shoot wildlife and sports, especially with its revamped auto-focus system. However, when you use a f/5.6 lens + a teleconverter you can NOT auto-focus. Huge bummer.

ALSO, and most troubling for me, is the revamped AF point illumination method. I learned after getting the camera that it uses a AF illumination method similar to that of the 7D, but it is radically different than any previous xxD series, 5D series, 1D series, and/or 1Ds series camera. What makes it so troublesome? The AF point is no longer highlighted in red when selecting an AF point and it is not solid red when using AI Servo mode. In low light circumstances and when you have to rapidly change AF points to change composition you get lost in the viewfinder trying to find the AF point. Even in brightly lit scenes where the subject is dark it is difficult to see easy. I do a lot of Montana photography and western photography which includes fast moving cowboys, native Americans dancing in powwows, wildlife, etc. and this issue affects every type of photography I do. Making cowboy photos is especially difficult compared to my 5D Mark II. It just is not nearly as intuitive as the method was with any of my previous cameras. It is VERY annoying.

These two issues are disappointing because if Canon had not erred in these matters the 5D Mark III would be one of the best Canon cameras I've ever owned. Now it is a camera that causes me to curse at times, especially in low-light circumstances when it is very hard to see the black AF point.

Now for the positive things; the camera's auto-focus is VERY snappy. Image quality is superb. Colors, contrast, etc. are awesome. I've owned dozens of Canon lenses, and when this camera is mated to one of Canon's newer zoom lenses it shines, so much so I no longer miss the image quality of my prime lenses.

To see how this camera shines, here is a small sampling of images I've taken with this camera (most with the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L II IS USM:

I had the opportunity to shoot both a Nikon d800 and this camera for one week, to determine which camera I'd keep. I prefer to shoot in JPEG, after years of shooting exclusively in RAW. Previous to this camera, I've owned a wide variety of full frame cameras, including the d300, 5D, d700 and 5d Mark II.

I have been shooting with a 5D Mark II since it was first introduced. The image quality of the JPEG output of the Mark III is clearly superior - especially as it pertains to high ISO output. I exclusively shot RAW in the 5dII, primarily due to the unimpressive JPEG engine. The biggest revelation of the Mark III has been it's superlative JPEG output. It's incredibly liberating to shoot at ISO 12,800 and get images with minimal noise and excellent color retention and detail. It's essentially made RAW irrelevant for me. With the 50 mm 1.4 lens, I have practically little need for flash. This is an enormous advantage and to be able to get excellent images straight out of the camera using the native JPEG engine is awesome. The d800 has a technically impressive sensor, and the noise performance of that camera is very good. That said, you have to shoot RAW to extract the DR advantages of the d800 and files are just enormous, particularly in that format. Furthermore, the ISO performance still lags behind the 5DIII and, in JPEG, there is no contest (though the d800 is still very good).

More importantly, I prefer the metering of the 5DIII. There is a slight tendency to underexpose, but the d800 frequently overexposes by 1/3-2/3 stop, in my experience. The native color tone/WB of the Nikon is also greener than the 5DIII and requires more PP to optimize the color. I've tried custom curves and custom auto white balance tones, but was not able to nail the color rendition. In terms of color, I find the Canon to be an easier camera to use, with less PP required.

Detail from the 5DIII is excellent. The d800 has more resolution, but I find that you really need to carefully set up a shot (ideally on a tripod) to extract the most of this sensor. Additionally, the d800 requires a much higher shutter speed to avoid shake when handheld. This results in higher noise issues, as the ISO has to be pushed to compensate in lower light.

The build quality of the 5DIII is top tier. It is superior to the Nikon, which is a first in my experience. The d800 grip is thin and the lack of thumb rest means that you end up pinching the body. The Canon grip is FAR superior. It feels molded to my hand and the large thumb hook lets the body just stick to your hand. The metal finish of the Canon has a more expensive feel and the tight, dense and compact 5dIII body just feels nicer to hold than the d800. This, in my opinion, is the most important difference between these bodies. The ergonomics of the Canon, is also preferable, as it pertains to button placement and quality.

The d800 sensor is a technological marvel, and I was tempted to keep it from that principle alone. The only problem is that the Canon is more enjoyable to shoot, comfortable to hold and, ultimately, I prefer the image quality of the 5dIII. The Nikon really needs RAW processing and careful technique to see any advantages (primarily at base ISO) and the inconvenience of manipulating 75MB RAW images is not a trivial issue. From my real world usage standpoint, the 5dIII was clearly superior when I tested both cameras.

The Canon AF is excellent - a big improvement from the 5DII, which was essentially crippled (though it had very good center point accuracy). It's so nice not having to focus and recompose. The Nikon AF is it's equal. Low light performance is basically the same, as well, though the d800 AF assist lamp can potentially increase accuracy in very low light situations.

The d800 is a great camera and is better suited to landscape photography or static subjects, in my opinion. If you shoot primarily handheld pictures of real people, then I recommend the 5dIII - I simply have more keepers with this camera.

These are very different cameras - both excellent and both very different with different strengths. If you are starting fresh, I'd recommend renting both before deciding which system works best for you.

Oct 27, 2012

philberOnlineBuy and Sell: On

Registered: May 20, 2008Location: FrancePosts: 9831

Review Date: Oct 13, 2012

Recommend? no |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 7

Pros:

Everything that was wrong or weak with the 6D MkII got fixed or improved.

Cons:

Only that which was wrong or weak with the MK II got fixed or improved. For 3 1/2 years of "evolution", that is not enough. That plus the heavy price tag make it much less competitive than the original 5D and the MKII II were

Having happily owned a 40D and two 5D Mk IIs, I looked forward to the MK III for a long time before it finally came out. My dealer only got his first copies two days before a major trip to Patagonia, so I bought mine sight unseen, else I would not have done it.
Yes, Canon fixed or improved whatever wasn't right or good enough with the MK II. Starting with the grat new AF, the body construction, etc... MK III has dual card slots and other goodies, which is great.
The problem is the IQ. It is essentially the same as the MK II, which was outstanding 3 1/2 years ago. But, whereas Canon have remained static during that very long time, Sony have not, hence the newer Sony sensors handily outperfom the Canon, as can be seen in DxO tests, with, for exemple, the Nikon D800 twins.
When first shooting the MK III, I felt that the IQ would be better, because that is the way it looked on the rear LCD. But when I looked at the RAW on my screen, no dice! The improvement comes from the JPEG engine, not the RAW IQ.
So, in a nutshell, if you are not upgrading from the MK II, or if you are after a pro camera that shouldnt' fail, or if it doesn't bother you that Nikon have better IQ for less money, you could be very happy with the MK III. Otherwise, buy a MK II. Same IQ for a lot less money, or the newer 6D. I sold my Mk III, and Canon lost me as a customer. And I am not alone...

this is the best camera canon has ever made. It has amazing autofocus, good built, great ergonomics, great viewfinder, excellent metering, etc. Compared to what canon has offered in the past, its also a great value, as this could be all means be the 1dsIV. However the camera does not exist in a vacuum, and the elephant in the jungle is Nikon with both its d600 and d800. This camera with the sensor of Nikon d800 or d600 would be the cats meow, and I would even say its price would be justified compared to competition. but as things are now, canon is falling further and further behind sony (and hence Nikon) in the sensor technology. there are currently 3 reasons to by this camera
1. You are well invested in to canon, and its two painful and costly to switch (my case)
2. you want to shoot fast moving objects, you are not focal length limited, and you want the best value. The autofocus on 5d3 and 1dx is the best out there. better than what Nikon or anyone else offers. High iso performance is very good (though the d600 appears to be a touch better in raw), and 6fps is very good. d600 would not match it in AF, neither would d800. D4 is a lot more money.
3. There are specific lenses on the canon lineup that you really like, such is mpe-65, 100-400L, 70-200 f4L IS, 17 TSE, or the big whites.
Otherwise, between d800 or d600, you can find better value and better images.

As a pro, I have exclusively used 1-series bodies, 1D, 1DM3, & 1DM4, until now. The 5DM3 compares not only favourably, but I think its better in AF accuracy and file quality, producing beautiful and consistent images in all kinds of shooting situations.

It handles fast action, and very low light equally well, with superb colour and clarity. As an event photographer I appreciate files that come right out of the camera needing minimal post processing, as sellable images. However, if an image needs to be pushed in processing, the 5DM3 file does not fall apart.

The menu is intuitive and most items are easy to get to with one hand. If you don't need a high frame rate, the 5DM3 is a must have body. I spend a lot of long hours shooting, its a joy to work with.

I've always been somewhat disappointed by the AF accuracy (even One Shot AF) of my 1D Mark III and 7D bodies. The 5D Mark III finally gives me the accuracy I need. I did notice that AF in low light can be quite slow compared to the aforementioned bodies, especially when using slower (f/4) lenses.

Image quality is nothing short of amazing. Detail at lower ISO settings is stunning and usable ISO 6400 images open up many new possibilities.

The in-camera RAW processing functionality is great for quickly delivering a processed JPEG to a client. The image rating system makes it easy to make a quick selection of deliverable images as well. Exposure, white balance and many other parameters can be changed after shooting the RAW file. Greatly missed is the ability to crop the image, though! I would thank Canon on my knees if they included this functionality in a firmware upgrade.

The 5fps continuous shooting speed is very good for a full-frame camera of this price point, but the difference with my 10fps 1D Mark III is very noticeable when trying to capture fast action.

None (its price is not a negative as such...more a reflection of just what a remarkable camera you are getting)

Let me set the scene... 1986 and Canon launches the T90... A camera that was way ahead of its time and legendary. Within months I had one...it did everything and more I had ever hoped on a 35mm camera. Though it now gathers dust in my study...it's still in perfect working order...and I still marvel at its design.

And so it is 6-years ago I went into digital SLR with a 400d, adding the remarkable 24-70mm and 70-200mm lenses. And I've been waiting ever since for Canon to repeat that 'giant step forward' as they did with the T90.

And then in 2012 the 5d mkIII is launched. A remarkable camera on paper and, having now owned one for several weeks, in the hand. To call this camera MkIII suggests it is an upgraded MkII. Well, it isn't, as reviews will attest to.

The resolution from the FF sensor is incredible, the 'bokeh' is simply stunning. The autofocus is 'blistering' in speed, extremely accurate, versatile and seemingly quite easy to get to grips with.

The build quality I cannot fault. The menu system is very intuitive and the speed of how the controls function is instantaneous. The in-built HDR is really good to have, as is the option of SD or CF cards. Its low-light performance is truly very, very good (having shot recently indoors at 8000 ISO).

Ok, so its price is perhaps a little high, but 'you pay for what you get'... and you are getting an amazing camera for this price. Is it worth the extra beyond a 7d? I think FF is something once you've experienced, there is no going back (and the viewfinderon the 5d MkIII is quite literally twice that in size of the 400d).

Canon really has got everything right with this camera and the images I am getting are exceptional. Truly a very well-deserved 10/10 Canon. Thank you!

I went to Focus on Imaging and thought it looked a good upgrade to 5D Mk2.
I waited until after first models were in good supply before deciding to look at one in earnest.
Part exchanged my 1D MK3 and 5D MK2 with grip for one, then added grip and 600EX.
I have had the camera about a month mainly using camera for studio shots until today when I took it to the Olympic mens Marathon to try out the autofocus. Although I played around with the settings in the focus menu I came back gobsmacked at how good the focus is. I would say better than the 1D3 and obviously far better than the 5D2.
I loved the image quality of my 5D2 and this is about a stop better. i still find I dial in about +2 thirds EV as I did with 5D2 and colours seem a bit more saturated.
If you have any doubts about moving up to this camera put them aside, it is not a an upgraded 5D2 but a completley new beast, you will love this camera.

I've used and been very happy with the 5D2 for years (before that a 350D and 40D).
Image quality was never a problem for the 5D2, but it always felt a little slow. The outer AF points were next to useless so I lived in the world of focus-recompose. Not good with a 35 f/1.4

No longer. After a very short while I realised the 5D3 was a completely different animal. In the few weeks since getting the camera I've shot football and cricket matches along with animals on a zoo trip. The camera has performed admirably...even shooting a cricket match in failing light the AF coped well (btw multiple exposure at cricket matches is fun :-))

The AF has easily locked on in low light... even when a friend with a slightly faster focussing lens and a 1D3 was hunting.

My only problem is that I can't blame the camera any more. Any failing is due to the soft squidgy organic bit behind the viewfinder.

Did I mention the rear screen? ....wow!!!

Aug 8, 2012

ryan aguasOfflineImage Upload: Off

Registered: Dec 7, 2006Location: PhilippinesPosts: 42

Review Date: Jul 14, 2012

Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $3,400.00
| Rating: 10

Pros:

All I ever wanted my 5Dc upgrade should be

Cons:

none about the camera itself - just for the high introductory price of $3500

I waited for this camera for 6 years, and finally the "real" upgrade to the 5D classic is here. For years, I loved using my 5Dc because it gave me the 35mm perspective that the APSC cameras cannot provide. I skipped the 5DmkII upgrade as it did not address the main weakness of the 5D classsic which was the sluggish AF.
When the 5D mark3 specs was announced, I knew right away that I need this camera. When it came out last March, I was able to purchase a copy right away. It indeed fulfilled the gap that I had been missing from my 5D for all these years. The 5Dmk3's AF was not only fast, but it was also very accurate (even the off-center Af points) and it does not hunt in low light. With this added feature alone I would have been vey satisfied with this camera...but then, there's more -- amazing high ISO, 22mp, Full-HD movie, high quality LCD, Live view, etc., the list goes on...